Incredibly bad look for this community.

[Rehab1]

2 hours ago, mike_bike_kite said:

It's a shame really because the sentiment behind this thread is very heartfelt around the globe.

Ok time to circle back and read @Paul A ‘s excellent, succinct summation on this topic  

 

[Paulo Mesquita]

15 hours ago, mike_bike_kite said:

It's a shame really because the sentiment behind this thread is very heartfelt around the globe. Here in the UK they've recently officially made EUC's illegal and imposed fines, confiscation of your wheel and removing half the points from your drivers license (ie if it happens twice then you can't drive). Why's this happened? because young (and sometimes not so young) idiots ride around with no respect for others. It's mostly been escooter riders here in the UK (simply because there are more of them) but I went on a group EUC ride and people were riding fast on crowded footpaths accompanied by loud music. Is it because they all feel they're playing GTA or is it because that's how "advanced" riders on youtube ride?

I honestly see these youtube videos as just hammering nails into the coffin of EUC riding. I appreciate that they get more clicks by showing aggressive riding on youtube but sadly younger, more impressionable, riders feel they have to ride the same way. That then results in crackdowns and that means less sales going forward - I personally won't buy another wheel until they're legal in my country. If I do get caught then I'll have to give up as I just can't afford to loose my license.

It's a shame because these things (EUC, escooters etc) are a valid answer to city transport. They're cheap to run, there's no pollution, they reduce congestion and they're a really fun way to get around. Unfortunately, nearly all our youtube "spokespeople" promote them as urban weapons to be ridden in the most aggressive way possible. I guess all I can do is just press the thumbs down each time I see videos like this. 

That is the entire dillema we face. In Portugal we can still rude because we're very few. But I expect to have trouble in the future due to all the rental e-scooter bad behavior. 

[Paulo Mesquita]

13 hours ago, Rehab1 said:

Ok time to circle back and read @Paul A ‘s excellent, succinct summation on this topic  

 

He was surprised because he is an absolute moron!!! Quite simple. Let me be more clear: I fully loathe people with that level of stupidity. I actually consider them sub human, and honestly I don't wish them well at all. 

I don't know what shocks me more: his riding behavior or his surprise over the comments. Because his surprise is "all revealing" of the imbecile and the danger he is. 

[Skeptikos]

No, that doesn't add up at all. You're talking about someone who is a very experienced rider. The idea that an experienced rider in NYC is an "imbecile" when it comes to riding around pedestrians just isn't believable. It's just flat out impossible.

The obvious explanation for his surprise is that he didn't consider it to be as dangerous as many in this thread are claiming it is.

And honestly the evidence is on his side. I'm not aware of any pedestrian who has ever been injured or killed by Tarzan.

Let's say we accept the claims by many in this thread, that his riding is incredibly dangerous. How many injuries or deaths would we predict that he's caused, given this level of danger? Pedestrians are everywhere in NYC, and my understanding is that he's done quite a bit of riding. Given the alleged incredible level of danger and his alleged incredible level of carelessness around pedestrians, clearly we would have to predict many injuries-- dozens, if not more.

Instead there are zero.

That's a big problem for the people throwing a fit over this. It means what you're saying isn't consistent with reality.

And that's a big part of the reason I'm not on board with this thread and I see it as a mob-like pile-on. The accusations a lot of people are throwing out are far too extreme to even be plausible and the level of reaction and vitriol is irrational.

[Skeptikos]

You can definitely make the case that this particular instance with the little girl was very dangerous and that Tarzan made a misjudgment about that while in the middle of a race.

But the argument that NYC riders are constantly riding recklessly and putting people in danger just makes zero sense-- if that's the case, then where are the victims?

[Paul A]

Six still frames, consecutive and one second apart, of NY Alley race video from Speedy Feet's video.

Time stamps attached.

Frame time stamp. 33.11

Frame time stamp. 33.12

Frame time stamp. 33.13

Frame time stamp. 33.14

Frame time stamp. 33.15

Frame time stamp. 33.15a

 

Counting the number of cars parked on the left hand side gives an indication of the distance covered in the five seconds between the first frame and the last frame.

It gives an indication of the speed that the rider was travelling at.

It can be clearly seen in the first and subsequent frames, the traffic light was already red, and there are already pedestrians on the crossing.

The time mark of frame five and six is 33.15.  One second has not even elapsed between these two last frames.

[Skeptikos]

I count zero victims in every frame. 😛

But seriously, it's totally irrational that people are going frame by frame over an event where there was no accident and no one was hurt. All sense of perspective has been lost here.

Just tell him to be less reckless next time and move on with your life, this happened more than a month ago.

[mrelwood]

 

56 minutes ago, Skeptikos said:

The obvious explanation for his surprise is that he didn't consider it to be as dangerous as many in this thread are claiming it is.

We have seen clear 1st personal footage of the ride. There’s nothing to question, the events are very clear to us.

 

56 minutes ago, Skeptikos said:

How many injuries or deaths would we predict that he's caused, given this level of danger?

Do you measure the level of danger only by injuries or deaths in other areas as well? I hope you don’t, because it doesn’t work, especially for such a small group of data.

We are all at least somewhat smart and sensible people, and we can assess the level of danger with other and better means than just counting the dead afterwards.

 If the injuries would be the only way to measure danger, Russian roulette would be considered a zero risk event in most cases. But we are smarter than that, aren’t we?

 

42 minutes ago, Skeptikos said:

You can definitely make the case that this particular instance with the little girl was very dangerous and that Tarzan made a misjudgment about that while in the middle of a race.

Didn’t you just…? I don’t quite get where you stand with this. There were still no deaths or injuries, were there? So how was it dangerous?

 

42 minutes ago, Skeptikos said:

But the argument that NYC riders are constantly riding recklessly and putting people in danger just makes zero sense

I’m not sure who has made such arguments, as I don’t remember reading any. Could you find a quote?

This thread has been about the single event, the Alleycat Race. The critique has been raised towards 1) organizing such event, 2) sharing the moments of “misjudgement” on a popular YouTube channel, and 3) ever riding like Tarzan does in his misjudged moment, as you put it. Nobody has claimed that anyone rides like that all the time. Everybody knows that’s not the case.

As you said yourself, you agree that Tarzan made a misjudgment and caused a very dangerous situation. He disagrees with you, as he didn’t find it dangerous.

[Menace]

I'm pretty sure this was Turbo, not Tarzan. It even says so in the frame from the video.

This was certainly not responsible riding, but I do agree that it is a bit silly to still be going frame by frame several months after the event happened. Everyone makes mistakes, and at a certain point you have to forgive them.

[Skeptikos]

A quote? Sure thing, @mrelwood. I did that on June 19th, right after you asked the first time. I know it's been a long thread, but it's embarrassing that you still claim to be unaware. It was already a weird thing to say when you said it the first time (didn't you read the thread?).

 

9 minutes ago, mrelwood said:

Do you measure the level of danger only by injuries or deaths in other areas as well?

Often times yes. That's the most common way danger is measured.

 

I guess you're a bit confused about my argument. It seems simple to me but maybe people are tripping over it because I'm not taking a consistent "side".

I do acknowledge that the one scene people keep posting was reckless and possibly dangerous. I don't know the exact level of danger so I won't argue about that.

I don't acknowledge that NYC riders are generally reckless and dangerous, because the data doesn't support that. You compared it to a single round of Russian roulette. In reality NYC riders have done a ton of riding (100s of thousands of miles?), so at this point it's the equivalent of many thousands of rounds of Russian roulette. No one has died yet or even been seriously injured that I know of, so at this point we should acknowledge that there's very likely no bullet in the gun. The whole thing about dangerous NYC riding is wrong. And even for some specific individuals with a long riding history we can say that it's wrong.

There's a clear, unavoidable implication from this. If, like many people are alleging here, this one scene was incredibly dangerous, then the other data we have available tells us that it has to be exceptional. Turbo and other riders are not normally riding with that level of danger.

And based on that I think people really need to chill with the NYC criticism.

 

6 minutes ago, Menace said:

I'm pretty sure this was Turbo, not Tarzan. It even says so in the frame from the video.

Sorry, I should have said Turbo then.

[gon2fast]

I think it is time to be honest. I have ridden my wheels like a jerk. Maybe going faster than I should have or disobeying traffic laws. Point is, none of us are legal so we all do the same damage until we unite and secure our spot on the road. The race was reckless, but nobody was injured, valid point. Let's move on and start a conversation that will help protect our right to be on the road. 

[mrelwood]

4 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

A quote? Sure thing, @mrelwood. I did that on June 19th, right after you asked the first time. I know it's been a long thread, but it's embarrassing that you still claim to be unaware. It was already a weird thing to say when you said it the first time (didn't you read the thread?).

My memory is a bit bad, and I’m sometimes embarrassed about it. But recognizing that amongst NYC riders does exist a gang like mentality in their YT videos, and claiming that

6 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

NYC riders are constantly riding recklessly and putting people in danger

are quite different to my ears. That’s why I didn’t recognize the claims you mentioned. So I didn’t read your quote in that way either. But English is not my native language, and it is possible that I read some expressions a bit wrong.

 

4 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

Often times yes. That's the most common way danger is measured.

I don’t think you have much of a source for knowing the most common way of measuring danger. It could be for you personally though.

 I see this quite differently. I assess the danger of various situations almost on a daily basis about situations where I have not previously harmed myself (or died). And I have no data of how many other people have harmed themselves or died in the same situations. To me this is the most basic form of assessing danger, reasoning. It’s what self preservation is based on amongst all humans and animals. (Animals don’t necessarily possess much data on past injuries of other animals, yet they constantly assess danger.)

One example of assessing danger/risk/probability from statistics: Statistical data says that the possibility of someone in the Danish soccer team getting a heart attack when playing against Finland at the championships is 100%. So extremely dangerous.

 But I’m not sure if we’re only dwelling into semantics about what the word “danger” means, and whether one should use the word “risk” or “probability of injury” instead or something.

 Either way, almost everyone who has seen the specific part of the video, has been capable of recognizing that in the specific situation the probability of having caused bodily harm to other people was high. Call it danger, risk, or whatever you want.
 

4 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

I do acknowledge that the one scene people keep posting was reckless and possibly dangerous. I don't know the exact level of danger so I won't argue about that.

And it’s the scene that has kept this thread alive, as well as the discussion about how the community and peers should take that kind of riding.

 Exact level of danger is always unknown, so it’s sufficient to recognize that it was “high”.

 

4 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

The whole thing about dangerous NYC riding is wrong. And even for some specific individuals with a long riding history we can say that it's wrong.

Despite a long riding history a single rider is still just a single rider. If you prefer to assess danger from statistics alone, you can’t do it reliably from a single rider.

 

4 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

Turbo and other riders are not normally riding with that level of danger.

I believe so too. 

[Planemo]

2 hours ago, gon2fast said:

I think it is time to be honest. I have ridden my wheels like a jerk.

While we are being honest, so have I.

2 hours ago, gon2fast said:

so we all do the same damage 

This is the bit I disagree on, and why I stopped riding like a jerk after a relatively short space of time.

'Public Perception' is all I need to say really. It matters not that we as riders aren't hitting people or cars. The issue is riding like a twat and what the public think of that. This is far less important if we were legal, but we're not.

We can argue the toss that theres plenty of cars driving idiots too, but lets be honest, the vast majority dont blow red lights, scream through zebra crossings, cross multiple lanes in one go etc etc. At least not in my experience.

For me this thread isnt about NYC riders, its about ALL riders who choose to ride like they own the road (and pavement, and sidewalks, and etc etc). For those countries like us in the UK who have laws making EUC's totally illegal ie no grey area about it, we need the public on side, or at least the majority. One idiot blasting through a built up area full of pedestrians will do more damage to our cause than 10 riders being careful and yeilding to everyone they meet. The negative backlash we have had from hired e-scooters has been astronomical. This wouldnt really be an issue in countries where escoots are legal but we havent got that foothold here yet.

At the end of the day I ride like I yeild to everyone. I have no business nor place in any area other than a private one, so everyone I see or meet has more of a right of way than I do. Keeping that mantra is easy when we have zero allowances for euc's. I appreciate that many countries are different, which is why I havent charged into chastising NYC riders - at least you have some sort of legality to start with. But whatever the allowance, and despite there being no injuries/collisions, I struggle to accept that the public were ok with the alleycat race. Thats the only point I'm trying to make really.

[bracky72]

Many drunk drivers go years without incident. Until they kill someone. Getting lucky is hardly a valid rationalization. 

[Paulo Mesquita]

7 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

I count zero victims in every frame. 😛

But seriously, it's totally irrational that people are going frame by frame over an event where there was no accident and no one was hurt. All sense of perspective has been lost here.

Just tell him to be less reckless next time and move on with your life, this happened more than a month ago.

You still don't get it!!! We're all f*ckd if this behavior spreads around with other riders that, alike this idiot, become surprised that children and senior citizens on crosswalks are " in the way of a lunatic rider. And be assured that if EUCs start hurting or killing people we're all gonna pay. There are already European countries that are becoming very "hard lined" with PEVs. 

 

10 minutes ago, bracky72 said:

Many drunk drivers go years without incident. Until they kill someone. Getting lucky is hardly a valid rationalization. 

👍👍👍👍👍

[Paulo Mesquita]

8 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

You can definitely make the case that this particular instance with the little girl was very dangerous and that Tarzan made a misjudgment about that while in the middle of a race.

But the argument that NYC riders are constantly riding recklessly and putting people in danger just makes zero sense-- if that's the case, then where are the victims?

You don't race in a city with pedestrians on crosswalks!! Is this too difficult to understand??? 

[Paulo Mesquita]

7 hours ago, mrelwood said:

 

We have seen clear 1st personal footage of the ride. There’s nothing to question, the events are very clear to us.

 

Do you measure the level of danger only by injuries or deaths in other areas as well? I hope you don’t, because it doesn’t work, especially for such a small group of data.

We are all at least somewhat smart and sensible people, and we can assess the level of danger with other and better means than just counting the dead afterwards.

 If the injuries would be the only way to measure danger, Russian roulette would be considered a zero risk event in most cases. But we are smarter than that, aren’t we?

 

Didn’t you just…? I don’t quite get where you stand with this. There were still no deaths or injuries, were there? So how was it dangerous?

 

I’m not sure who has made such arguments, as I don’t remember reading any. Could you find a quote?

This thread has been about the single event, the Alleycat Race. The critique has been raised towards 1) organizing such event, 2) sharing the moments of “misjudgement” on a popular YouTube channel, and 3) ever riding like Tarzan does in his misjudged moment, as you put it. Nobody has claimed that anyone rides like that all the time. Everybody knows that’s not the case.

As you said yourself, you agree that Tarzan made a misjudgment and caused a very dangerous situation. He disagrees with you, as he didn’t find it dangerous.

Very well put 👍👍👍👍

[Paulo Mesquita]

7 hours ago, Menace said:

I'm pretty sure this was Turbo, not Tarzan. It even says so in the frame from the video.

This was certainly not responsible riding, but I do agree that it is a bit silly to still be going frame by frame several months after the event happened. Everyone makes mistakes, and at a certain point you have to forgive them.

This is not a mistake. This is reckless behavior. It has to do with responsibility and the basic respect for the life of others. 

It's called empathy. Want to try? Just imagine the child is from your family.... 

[Paulo Mesquita]

6 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

A quote? Sure thing, @mrelwood. I did that on June 19th, right after you asked the first time. I know it's been a long thread, but it's embarrassing that you still claim to be unaware. It was already a weird thing to say when you said it the first time (didn't you read the thread?).

 

Often times yes. That's the most common way danger is measured.

 

I guess you're a bit confused about my argument. It seems simple to me but maybe people are tripping over it because I'm not taking a consistent "side".

I do acknowledge that the one scene people keep posting was reckless and possibly dangerous. I don't know the exact level of danger so I won't argue about that.

I don't acknowledge that NYC riders are generally reckless and dangerous, because the data doesn't support that. You compared it to a single round of Russian roulette. In reality NYC riders have done a ton of riding (100s of thousands of miles?), so at this point it's the equivalent of many thousands of rounds of Russian roulette. No one has died yet or even been seriously injured that I know of, so at this point we should acknowledge that there's very likely no bullet in the gun. The whole thing about dangerous NYC riding is wrong. And even for some specific individuals with a long riding history we can say that it's wrong.

There's a clear, unavoidable implication from this. If, like many people are alleging here, this one scene was incredibly dangerous, then the other data we have available tells us that it has to be exceptional. Turbo and other riders are not normally riding with that level of danger.

And based on that I think people really need to chill with the NYC criticism.

 

Sorry, I should have said Turbo then.

To be clear I am not talking about NYC riders. I'm taking about dangerous idiots with that kind of behavior. They could also be in Portugal, and I'd have the same reaction! 

[Paul A]

https://www.criminallawyernyc.com/ny-penal-law-§-120-25-reckless-endangerment-in-the-first-degree/

NY Penal Law § 120.25: Reckless endangerment in the first degree

NY Penal Law § 120.25: Reckless endangerment in the first degree

If you behave in a manner that shows that you have no regard for human life, you could face a felony reckless endangerment in the first degree charge. It does not matter if no one was actually injured. In order to be charged and convicted of reckless endangerment, the prosecutor needs only to bring evidence to demonstrate that your actions place other people at risk. Reckless endangerment in the first degree is one of two reckless endangerment offenses in the New York criminal code. It is the more serious of the two charges, compared to reckless endangerment in the second degree, which is a misdemeanor offense.   You could be prosecuted under New York Penal Code § 120.25 if you recklessly engage in actions that creates a grave risk of death to another person under circumstances which evince a depraved indifference to human life. Over time, New York courts have interpreted the phrase “depraved indifference to human life” to mean “an utter disregard for the value of human life— a willingness to act not because one intends harm, but because one simply doesn’t care whether grievous harm results or not.”

 

New York Reckless Endangerment Penalties: Fines, Prison Sentence

A conviction of reckless endangerment means incarceration, fines, restitution, probation or some combination. The maximum sentence is 7 years in prison. The precise length of time to serve would depend on prior criminal history if an injury resulted from your actions, the severity of the injury and whether or not you show remorse.

The magistrate may also order payment of a fine and restitution. For reckless endangerment, the fine can be up to $5000. Compensation is paid to replace personal expenses that resulted from the crime. If you are convicted of reckless endangerment at a felony level, the maximum amount of restitution is $15000.

[Paulo Mesquita]

3 minutes ago, Paul A said:

https://www.criminallawyernyc.com/ny-penal-law-§-120-25-reckless-endangerment-in-the-first-degree/

NY Penal Law § 120.25: Reckless endangerment in the first degree

NY Penal Law § 120.25: Reckless endangerment in the first degree

If you behave in a manner that shows that you have no regard for human life, you could face a felony reckless endangerment in the first degree charge. It does not matter if no one was actually injured. In order to be charged and convicted of reckless endangerment, the prosecutor needs only to bring evidence to demonstrate that your actions place other people at risk. Reckless endangerment in the first degree is one of two reckless endangerment offenses in the New York criminal code. It is the more serious of the two charges, compared to reckless endangerment in the second degree, which is a misdemeanor offense.   You could be prosecuted under New York Penal Code § 120.25 if you recklessly engage in actions that creates a grave risk of death to another person under circumstances which evince a depraved indifference to human life. Over time, New York courts have interpreted the phrase “depraved indifference to human life” to mean “an utter disregard for the value of human life— a willingness to act not because one intends harm, but because one simply doesn’t care whether grievous harm results or not.”

 

New York Reckless Endangerment Penalties: Fines, Prison Sentence

A conviction of reckless endangerment means incarceration, fines, restitution, probation or some combination. The maximum sentence is 7 years in prison. The precise length of time to serve would depend on prior criminal history if an injury resulted from your actions, the severity of the injury and whether or not you show remorse.

The magistrate may also order payment of a fine and restitution. For reckless endangerment, the fine can be up to $5000. Compensation is paid to replace personal expenses that resulted from the crime. If you are convicted of reckless endangerment at a felony level, the maximum amount of restitution is $15000.

There you go! Someone should send this post above to the idiot who was so surprised. That is.. If he can read. (I know, I'm having a bad day... my daughter tested positive for covid today, her college graduation cerimony day. Tomorrow is her 23rd birthday and all festivities were canceled. We went to the hospital for Covid testing... and I had to cancel, my only week of vacation in the Algarve...) 

So I have an excuse for being so sour. 😒😒😒😒😒😒

[Paul A]

Hello Paulo, very sorry to hear about positive Covid tests.

People may not die from Covid, but there can be serious and permanent damage to the organs of heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, brain.

Survivors of Covid may not fully recover and suffer life long disability.

Covid is not just a serious flu.

Please take care, your family and friends.

[Paulo Mesquita]

30 minutes ago, Paul A said:

Hello Paulo, very sorry to hear about positive Covid tests.

People may not die from Covid, but there can be serious and permanent damage to the organs of heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, brain.

Survivors of Covid may not fully recover and suffer life long disability.

Covid is not just a serious flu.

Please take care, your family and friends.

Thanks Paul. My wife and I are fully vaccinated. I'm just worried about my daughter. Ironically, as of tomorrow, her 23rd birthday, she could legally get her 1st pfizer shot... 

[Rehab1]

58 minutes ago, Paulo Mesquita said:

my daughter tested positive for covid today, her college graduation cerimony day. Tomorrow is her 23rd birthday and all festivities were canceled.

So sorry to hear! She should be fine given her young age but what an insult to injury. I’m sure she worked hard to earn her degree and now has to miss simultaneous celebrations. Big bummer! 

 

 

[Eucner]

12 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

And honestly the evidence is on his side. I'm not aware of any pedestrian who has ever been injured or killed by Tarzan.

Let's say we accept the claims by many in this thread, that his riding is incredibly dangerous. How many injuries or deaths would we predict that he's caused, given this level of danger? Pedestrians are everywhere in NYC, and my understanding is that he's done quite a bit of riding. Given the alleged incredible level of danger and his alleged incredible level of carelessness around pedestrians, clearly we would have to predict many injuries-- dozens, if not more.

Instead there are zero.

That's a big problem for the people throwing a fit over this. It means what you're saying isn't consistent with reality.

We can count the risk by number of deaths, injuries and close calls. When we want minimize the deaths and injuries close to zero, the key is in close calls. Each close call could have ended differently. Only by minimizing the close calls, can deaths and injuries be minimized. Close calls are not shown in traffic statistics, because it would be too difficult and laborious to collect all the information. However there is statistics of given ticket from reckless endangerment, but these are only a small part all cases. The prevention of close calls is one of the main aspects considered when making traffic laws.

In the video we can clearly see a close call. Enough similar incidents will eventually lead to somebody dying or getting hurt. For the most of us it is not the way to go.

The EUC drivers are not the only active parties in the traffic. In the video an accident was not prevented by Turbo's NYC level superhuman driving skills. All the credits goes to the pedestrians. This can be a part of larger behaviour explaining some of the low number of EUC accidents with pedestrians.

10 hours ago, Skeptikos said:

There's a clear, unavoidable implication from this. If, like many people are alleging here, this one scene was incredibly dangerous, then the other data we have available tells us that it has to be exceptional. Turbo and other riders are not normally riding with that level of danger.

How many exceptional incident should be tolerated until it is not tolerable anymore? All traffic rules I know don't tolerate recklessness at all.